Video: Beware of … global weirding

posted at 10:41 am on April 4, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Surprised that spring has not yet sprung? Still bundling up for baseball opening days, when the icicles hand from the upper deck while curveballs hang over home plate? Time’s senior editor Bryan Walsh wants us to know that the cold spring and the long winter don’t actually dispute global warming, they confirm it. This is just the “global weirding” phase:

Six months ago, the UK’s Met Office — which has fueled much of the global-warming hysteria — produced data that shows no warming at all over the last sixteen years. That’s certainly weird to alarmists who insisted that their models showed a rapidly-approaching catastrophe that continued releases of carbon from energy consumption would continuously escalate.  That led to this exchange between climate scientists at the time:

“The new data confirms the existence of a pause in global warming,” Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Science at Georgia Tech university, tells the Daily Mail. Maybe, says Phil Jones, a University of East Anglia professor whose leaked emails were part of the “Climategate” scandal, but “I still think that the current decade which began in 2010 will be warmer by about 0.17 degrees than the previous one.”

And … so? The next decade after that might be cooler.  The models that previously showed increasing rates of upward change in temperatures have been proven at best to be unreliable, and those are the basis for Jones’ guess.  The extended cold winter that followed Jones’ prediction is as reliable for guessing the weather in 2020 as his models, but it’s still worth pointing out that we’re two weeks or more into spring with icicles still hanging off of roofs here in Minnesota. Fourteen years ago, Minneosta had a 95-degree heat wave in the same week (which prompted me to install air conditioning in the house, after which temperatures dropped back into the 50s).  Based on that model, by 2020 we’ll be knee-deep in another ice age.

Bottom line: one hot summer does not a global crisis make, nor one late spring a new ice age.  It’s called weather, and its only constant is change.  When we’re farming on Greenland as Europeans did for two medieval centuries, then I’ll start worrying that warmer weather — and its ability to produce more agriculture — might be a problem.

Yesterday, Forbes’ Harry Binswanger had some fun with the collapse of the latest climate hysteria by recalling the collapse of the previous one:

Remember 1979? That was the year of “We Are Family” by Sister Sledge, of “The Dukes of Hazard” on TV, and of “ Kramer vs. Kramer” on the silver screen. It was the year the Shah was forced out of Iran. It was before the web, before the personal computer, before the cell phone, before voicemail and answering machines. But not before the global warming campaign.

In January of 1979, a New York Times article was headlined: “Experts Tell How Antarctic Ice Could Cause Widespread Floods.” The abstract in theTimes archives says: “If the West Antarctic ice sheet slips into the sea, as some glaciologists believe is possible, boats could be launched from the bottom steps of the Capitol in Washington and a third of Florida would be under water, a climate specialist said today.”

By 1981 (think “Chariots of Fire“), the drum beat had taken effect. Quoting from the American Institute of Physics website: “A 1981 survey found that more than a third of American adults claimed they had heard or read about the greenhouse effect.”

So where’s the warming? Where are the gondolas pulling up to the Capitol? Where are the encroaching seas in Florida? Or anywhere? Where is the climate change which, for 33 years, has been just around the corner?

A generation and a half into climate change, née global warming, you can’t point to a single place on earth where the weather is noticeably different from what it was in 1979. Or 1879, for that matter. I don’t know what subliminal changes would be detected by precise instruments, but in terms of the human experience of climate, Boston is still Boston, Cairo is still Cairo, and Sydney is still Sydney.

And hysterics are still hysterics, and they’re just as weird as they were in 1979, 1879, or any other time period.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

So warming = AGW
and cooling = AGW
and no change = AGW.
Got it.
These folks are just talking out of their posterior.

rbj on April 4, 2013 at 10:44 AM

AGW=AlGropingWomen

Conservative4Ever on April 4, 2013 at 10:46 AM

Global warming is a leftist conspiracy to bring “politics” into the most innocuous conversation topic ever: the weather.

happytobehere on April 4, 2013 at 10:48 AM

When you have to redefine global warming to include cold weather and snow in April, I think we’ve reached the jump the shark phase of the movement.

Doughboy on April 4, 2013 at 10:48 AM

The weather is

It’s called weather, and its only constant is change.

Right on!

People would have a better chance of predicting ‘the weather’ using dice or a deck of cards.

ooonaughtykitty on April 4, 2013 at 10:50 AM

oops

ooonaughtykitty on April 4, 2013 at 10:51 AM

CAGW is like witch trials. Everything is proof that the accused is a witch.

The Monster on April 4, 2013 at 10:51 AM

My freezer is really cold – does that mean that it’s actually an oven?

Pork-Chop on April 4, 2013 at 10:52 AM

That’s certainly weird to alarmists who insisted that their models showed a rapidly-approaching catastrophe that continued releases of carbon from energy consumption would continuously escalate.

The weather has always been the weather. The climate change crowd have two different goals:

1. Continued government funding to track climate change.

2. The use of climate change to further other agenda items like curtailing the size of cars, redistributing billions in “carbon offsets,” and otherwise use climate change as an excuse for intruding into the private lives of citizens.

Happy Nomad on April 4, 2013 at 10:57 AM

When you have to redefine global warming to include cold weather and snow in April, I think we’ve reached the jump the shark phase of the movement.
Doughboy on April 4, 2013 at 10:48 AM

Yeah, except the electorate still believes it. We seriously need to entertain a different type of government. This “majority rules” thing ain’t working out.

happytobehere on April 4, 2013 at 10:58 AM

I see a lot of projection in the Al Gore/Chicken Littles of global warming. They are just as alarmed that we’re not concerned about global warming as they are alarmed about global warming itself. The common thread is their hysteria.

They believe global warming will soon lead to a catastrophe, and that those who disagree with them are also a catastrophe. While the truth is, most of us who don’t buy into “AGW is a catastrophe” just DON’T KNOW what’s going to happen, and so are reluctant to endorse carbon taxes and other measures that would damage the economy and lead to higher energy prices that would frankly hurt the poorest and sickest among us, while China and India remain the largest offenders.

In other words, they think those who disagree with them are as crazy as they are. And I’m here to say, no, we’re not! We’re just normal, thoughtful people, who look at evidence, and work to balance actions with consequences. And don’t believe the sky is falling.

Paul-Cincy on April 4, 2013 at 10:58 AM

Their concern with AGW is in the A, meaning Anthropological meaning Man Made meaning Over Population meaning they don’t know what they are talking about period……………..

fourdeucer on April 4, 2013 at 10:59 AM

I heard Hell is getting hotter by the day, but they could have been Ted Kennedy’s reception getting out of hand.

Archivarix on April 4, 2013 at 11:00 AM

1. Continued government funding to track climate change.

2. The use of climate change to further other agenda items like curtailing the size of cars, redistributing billions in “carbon offsets,” and otherwise use climate change as an excuse for intruding into the private lives of citizens.

Happy Nomad on April 4, 2013 at 10:57 AM

Okay that too!!!!

fourdeucer on April 4, 2013 at 11:00 AM

Obama said he was nervous about exactly one year ago because of the warm weather we were experiencing. We should get a new “state of the president’s nervousness about the weather” report so we can know whether to be nervous still or not.

If they want to call contrary weather “weirding”, then how do we know we aren’t entering an ice age and the warm weather we had wasn’t just some “weirding”? All of their “science” uses the begging-the-question fallacy whereby their warming hoax is assumed at the premise so all data that is collected is evidence of global warming one way or another, even the contradictory evidence.

Buddahpundit on April 4, 2013 at 11:02 AM

When we’re farming on Greenland as Europeans did for two medieval centuries, then I’ll start worrying that warmer weather — and its ability to produce more agriculture — might be a problem.

Thanks, Ed. I’ve been using that exact comparison for years.

Remember it’s called Greenland, because it used to be…wait for it…GREEN.

Like you, when it’s green again, I’ll worry.

Not. One. Second. Sooner.

Chris of Rights on April 4, 2013 at 11:06 AM

They believe global warming will soon lead to a catastrophe, and that those who disagree with them are also a catastrophe. While the truth is, most of us who don’t buy into “AGW is a catastrophe” just DON’T KNOW what’s going to happen, and so are reluctant to endorse carbon taxes and other measures that would damage the economy and lead to higher energy prices that would frankly hurt the poorest and sickest among us, while China and India remain the largest offenders.

Paul-Cincy on April 4, 2013 at 10:58 AM

It takes a certain amount of arrogance to think that man is so in control of the environment that change can be effected by wealth redistribution schemes like carbon credits.

These people point to “Superstorm Sandy” as some unprecedented disaster. As if an almost Cat 1 hurricane has never hit the coasts of New Jersey before. It is all absurd.

Happy Nomad on April 4, 2013 at 11:07 AM

When you have to redefine global warming to include cold weather and snow in April, I think we’ve reached the jump the shark phase of the movement.

Doughboy on April 4, 2013 at 10:48 AM

That’s why the call it Global Warming… er, Global Cooling… er, Climate Change. Yeh, that’s the ticket!

Hill60 on April 4, 2013 at 11:08 AM

Where’s your Global Warming now?!

Dongemaharu on April 4, 2013 at 11:08 AM

I see a lot of projection in the Al Gore/Chicken Littles of global warming. They are just as alarmed that we’re not concerned about global warming as they are alarmed about global warming itself. The common thread is their hysteria.

They believe global warming will soon lead to a catastrophe, and that those who disagree with them are also a catastrophe. While the truth is, most of us who don’t buy into “AGW is a catastrophe” just DON’T KNOW what’s going to happen, and so are reluctant to endorse carbon taxes and other measures that would damage the economy and lead to higher energy prices that would frankly hurt the poorest and sickest among us, while China and India remain the largest offenders.

In other words, they think those who disagree with them are as crazy as they are. And I’m here to say, no, we’re not! We’re just normal, thoughtful people, who look at evidence, and work to balance actions with consequences. And don’t believe the sky is falling.

Paul-Cincy on April 4, 2013 at 10:58 AM

+1,000,000,000,000

Chris of Rights on April 4, 2013 at 11:08 AM

Obama said he was nervous about exactly one year ago because of the warm weather we were experiencing. We should get a new “state of the president’s nervousness about the weather” report so we can know whether to be nervous still or not.

Buddahpundit on April 4, 2013 at 11:02 AM

Why would the rat-eared devil be nervous? His very election marked the day the seas began to recede and the planet began healing itself.

Happy Nomad on April 4, 2013 at 11:09 AM

One bonus of this cold spring? The maple syrup producers here in Northern New England have seen their season extended. Normally we never see sap boiling in April.

Del Dolemonte on April 4, 2013 at 11:09 AM

After Norah asks why the big change from last year, this idiot actually says

“It’s showing how unpredictable the climate and weather system can be”.

Really?

You can’t chart the weather like the stars?! Wow!

My gawd…Between Stengel and this goof, the main qualifications for Time is apparently “how smug can you look and sound on air”?

budfox on April 4, 2013 at 11:10 AM

Anybody can look backwards and say “I knew that was going to happen.”

But when and where was it specifically predicted?

Names, dates, and places, please. Not holding my breath.

Bat Chain Puller on April 4, 2013 at 11:10 AM

Hmmmmm….aren’t we entering the peak of the current solar cycle?

cozmo on April 4, 2013 at 11:11 AM

“…..when the icicles hand from the upper deck while curveballs hang over home plate?

Ed, I believe those icicles also hang?

Rovin on April 4, 2013 at 11:13 AM

I’m worried about the current solar cycle. NASA seems to think that the next cycle is going to be a Minimum. And back in the early 1800′s that was the phenomenon that started the Little Ice Age.

Nethicus on April 4, 2013 at 11:15 AM

So warming = AGW
and cooling = AGW
and no change = AGW.
Got it.
These folks are just talking out of their posterior.

rbj on April 4, 2013 at 10:44 AM

Karl Popper, a famous Austrian philosopher, wrote of the asymmetry between verification and falsifiability. He wrote that to prove something right, you must also develop the conditions where you can be wrong. In other words, how do you know what is right or wrong?

Here’s where the warmists have failed. They have come up with circumstances where no matter what the weather is, they are not wrong. In so doing, they have failed to provide the conditions where they are right.

itsspideyman on April 4, 2013 at 11:18 AM

Bryan Walsh, Ph.D. in editing at Time.

Seriously, why is he even talking about this?

aryeung on April 4, 2013 at 11:19 AM

Any one else notice a liberal trend here?

Global Warming…..Climate Change

Gay Marriage Rights……Marriage Equality

Radical left wing Democrat…….Liberal Progressive

“We” are all “evolving” now.

Rovin on April 4, 2013 at 11:19 AM

The sky is falling and the earth is warming at an alarming rate so you need to give us your money. Got it.

ghostwalker1 on April 4, 2013 at 11:20 AM

He has a Smart Beard.

Your argument is invalid.

Ben Hur on April 4, 2013 at 11:21 AM

All this AGW nonsense isn’t for us, it’s for the kiddies, if it stays in the news, educators can convince the young’uns that AGW is real oh so REAL! needs funding and we just have to help the poor snow bears and little islands… puhleeeze…

When Greenland is green again, WORRY!!(oh someone already said that, H/T)!

Scrumpy on April 4, 2013 at 11:22 AM

I’m worried about the current solar cycle. NASA seems to think that the next cycle is going to be a Minimum. And back in the early 1800′s that was the phenomenon that started the Little Ice Age.

Nethicus on April 4, 2013 at 11:15 AM

Breaking News: Tide Waters Rescinding—Al Gore’s beach-front property rises 15%!

Rovin on April 4, 2013 at 11:22 AM

No wait! When Iceland is no longer greenish then WORRY!! Phew…

Scrumpy on April 4, 2013 at 11:24 AM

AGW’ers are all Drama Queens, gives them somthing to talk about don’t it…lol…cuz they otherwise don’t have 2 brain cells to rub together! Hahahahahaha :-)

Scrumpy on April 4, 2013 at 11:30 AM

Time’s senior editor Bryan Walsh

So low information media playing for low information America has been reduced to interviewing others in low information journalism, and not scientists?

MNHawk on April 4, 2013 at 11:31 AM

…And hysterics are still hysterics, and they’re just as weird as they were in 1979, 1879, or any other time period.

Yeah, well, these particular hysterics control whole nation-states and command trillions of dollars in resources and the economies of billions of people. They stop the construction of dams and the propagation of life-saving genetically enhanced crops. They reduce once fertile farmland, such as California’s Central Valley, to impoverished wastelands like something out of ‘The Grapes of Wrath’. They view humanity as a blight, a chancre sore on the lower lip of Mother Gaia. Unless these zealots are stopped, whole generations will needlessly struggle and suffer to solve a problem that doesn’t exist.

Weird isn’t the word I would use for such people.

troyriser_gopftw on April 4, 2013 at 11:31 AM

Didn’t we reach “THE TIPPING POINT” in 2010?

And where are all of the “KILLER HURRICANES” like Katrina, that were supposed to follow one after the other?

GarandFan on April 4, 2013 at 11:32 AM

As Rich Lowry writes at NRO: “James Hansen thinks new coal-fired plants in China and India, releasing so-called aerosols into the atmosphere that act to suppress warming, may be partly responsible for the stasis in temperatures.”

How is this possible? We all know that coal burning power plants are evil and dirty and must be phased-out in order to save Gaia./

Bwahahaahhahahahahahaha!

Hill60 on April 4, 2013 at 11:34 AM

As an aside, MSP has only hit 95 once in April, 1980. The earliest 90 in history is April 15.

I remember no such heat wave in 1999. I remember 1991 with temps as high as 86, the first week of April, and of course, last year with the earliest 80 in history.

MNHawk on April 4, 2013 at 11:35 AM

When we’re farming on Greenland as Europeans did for two medieval centuries, then I’ll start worrying that warmer weather — and its ability to produce more agriculture — might be a problem.

There probably isn’t a big difference between the glacier Greenland and the Greenland the Vikings farmed. Just a climate degree or two with a bit of time for the region to assimilate the change. I think that is the lesson of Glacier Bay, Alaska. The difference between Glacier Bay being a bay and being the massive glacier that Captain Vancouver found in 1790 was probably very slight. A degree or two over the span of 100 years. So even if those parts of Greenland become farmable again, it’s not something out of whack since the evidence is that we are still in a long term warming cycle indicated by the Glacier Bay evidence and it’s clear that specific regions on the cusp where the average yearly temp is right around 0 celsius can have striking changes with just minor natural climate movement.

Buddahpundit on April 4, 2013 at 11:36 AM

And hysterics are still hysterics, and they’re just as weird as they were in 1979, 1879, or any other time period.

When I was in school, the hysteria was about the ozone layer vanishing and that the human race was doomed.

However, the Ozone Layer hysteria helped bring about two classic movies: Highlander 2: The Quickening (1991) and Waterworld (1995).

sentinelrules on April 4, 2013 at 11:37 AM

By this logic…

I ate at a sketch Mexican place last night. I fully expected to be playin’ the timpani in the bathroom this morning.

Instead, I’m constipated. Montezuma’s revenge in reverse!!!

Marcola on April 4, 2013 at 11:43 AM

Global stupid fazing. Or going “gaga for Gaga” faze.

onomo on April 4, 2013 at 11:45 AM

These folks are just talking out of their posterior.

rbj on April 4, 2013 at 10:44 AM

To quote a response to nonpartisan on a gun thread yesterday:

Wow, that statistic is so fresh from your ass I can smell it over the internet.

GWB on April 4, 2013 at 11:45 AM

So… warming makes it colder!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nyGqMAZYrA

The Rogue Tomato on April 4, 2013 at 11:46 AM

I’m confused. Can someone explain to me how being “Time’s Senior Editor” makes you some kind of authority on “Global Warming” ?

I’m missing the link there.

Considering the sorry state of “journalism” in this country, I’d say that title makes him an authority on just about NOTHING.

deadrody on April 4, 2013 at 11:48 AM

Bryan Walsh, Ph.D. in editing at Time.

Seriously, why is he even talking about this?

aryeung on April 4, 2013 at 11:19 AM

OMG, you are KIDDING me ?!!!?!?

What POS clown college has a Ph.D. program in “editing” ?

“You see, the author chose this word, but I looked in my thesaurus and used a much bigger synonym for that word.” – Ph.D. in editing

deadrody on April 4, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Global Warming is caused by the Sequester.

The Rogue Tomato on April 4, 2013 at 11:56 AM

Global warming alarmism is nothing but a scam. And just look how much money the biggest scam artists have made at it.

RebeccaH on April 4, 2013 at 11:57 AM

And hysterics are still hysterics, and they’re just as weird as they were in 1979, 1879, or any other time period.


The “scientific method” fits the theory to the facts – not the facts to the theory. Anyone fitting the facts to their theory is a snake oil salesperson.

There is only ONE irrefutable and indisputable FACT regarding the weather forecast for this planet we live on:

We are in a brief warming cycle between ICE AGES.

That fact is the only thing the “science is settled” on.

Every AGW theory is contradicted by the facts over the last 15 years.

We do NOT have the algorithms to adequately model the billions of parameters that affect the weather – most notably, a significant chunk of the universe surrounding the Earth has NEVER been modeled despite evidence the Sun and other stars have significant impact on cloud formation, among other things.

We are also at least 10 years away from having the computing power to run the appropriate algorithmic models.

PolAgnostic on April 4, 2013 at 11:57 AM

I graduated from Princeton University, and went East, arriving in Hong Kong, where I worked as an intern and then a staff report for TIME magazine’s Asia edition. I stayed in Hong Kong for five years, writing about everything from Chinese sex toys to Filipino boxers, before I settled on science and health. I reported on the SARS epidemic and bird flu threat, as well as Asia’s growing pollution problem. I spent a year as the Tokyo bureau chief for TIME before moving to New York in 2007, where I’ve lived since. I now write about energy and the environment, and blog at TIME’s Ecocentric site.

There ya go. Chinese sex toys to Filipino underwear to climate expert for low information America.

MNHawk on April 4, 2013 at 12:00 PM

Karl Popper, a famous Austrian philosopher, wrote of the asymmetry between verification and falsifiability. He wrote that to prove something right, you must also develop the conditions where you can be wrong. In other words, how do you know what is right or wrong?

Here’s where the warmists have failed. They have come up with circumstances where no matter what the weather is, they are not wrong. In so doing, they have failed to provide the conditions where they are right.

itsspideyman on April 4, 2013 at 11:18 AM

Popper was absolutely brilliant.

But the “conditions” statement is Not quite accurate…
The graph of expected temperatures with their associated probabilities….published in the Telegraph article re:no warming for 15 years…shows the actual temp trend falling out of the model of probablistic temps…which are the conditions established for “wrongness”.
Another year or two of stable temps and the model will have been proved wrong.

III

dirtengineer on April 4, 2013 at 12:05 PM

When we’re farming on Greenland as Europeans did for two medieval centuries, then I’ll start worrying that warmer weather — and its ability to produce more agriculture — might be a problem.

Thanks, Ed. I’ve been using that exact comparison for years.
Remember it’s called Greenland, because it used to be…wait for it…GREEN.
Like you, when it’s green again, I’ll worry.
Not. One. Second. Sooner.

Chris of Rights on April 4, 2013 at 11:06 AM

Ok – I feel the need to jump into this.
Was there gllobal catastrophe and flooding the last time Vikings were farming on Greenland?
If not, why should we be worried at all if it should get that way again?

This is kind of like the story of the AGW psychos discovering that 4000 year old tropical plants had been uncovered by a receding glacier in South America. They claimed that proved that AGW is happening and we’re in trouble.
My first thought was, that means 4000 years ago that area was also NOT under a glacier and had tropical weather. So what caused the region to be that warm back then, and what caused it to get so cold? I haven’t seen any discoveries showing the ancient Mayans drove gas guzzling SUVs….

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 12:11 PM

We are also at least 10 years away from having the computing power to run the appropriate algorithmic models.

PolAgnostic on April 4, 2013 at 11:57 AM

We need a really big@ss supercomputer that can determine for us the ultimate answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything. THEN we’ll be able to figure out what’s goin on.

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 12:14 PM

The old top-down, command-and-control, litigation model of environmental management won’t just fade away and let pro-business, pro-environment approaches flourish. The reason for this is that many of the people pushing AGW are control freaks who have positioned themselves on this issue simply to force others to obey them. People out of control of their own lives tend to try to control other people, and they gravitate to jobs which give them authority over others.

Christien on April 4, 2013 at 12:16 PM

The unshielded thermonuclear fusion plant that is 1,300,000,000,000 times the size of the earth 8 light minutes away has nothing, NOTHING, to do with the climate on our planet.

jukin3 on April 4, 2013 at 12:21 PM

We need a really big@ss supercomputer that can determine for us the ultimate answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything. THEN we’ll be able to figure out what’s goin on.

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 12:14 PM

It’s 42.

Lily on April 4, 2013 at 12:26 PM

We need a really big@ss supercomputer that can determine for us the ultimate answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything. THEN we’ll be able to figure out what’s goin on.

My TRS-80 says “42″.

drunyan8315 on April 4, 2013 at 12:27 PM

In my mind, there are six issues related to global warming:

1) Is global warming occurring at all? [This question, considered over a long period, is far more complex than scoffing liberals comprehend.]

2) If it is occurring, how much is caused by man? [A first step in any reasonable discussion of this issue should be acknowledgement that climate swings are wild and frequent and have been for the entire age of the earth.]

3) Also, if it is occurring, will this do more harm than good? [For example, besides the Greenland example Ed gives, it's well understood that mankind is now experiencing a short interglacial warming period; when it begins to get cold again, it's going to get very cold. Wouldn't it help if the earth were a little warmer when inevitable glaciation begins?]

4) If global warming is occurring and man is causing it and this is causing harm, is the best way to counteract it to unilaterally slow down our own production of wealth? [Analogously, is the best method of preventing warfare to unilaterally disarm? Probably not.] A related issue is considering whether slowing down the production of wealth just might possibly cause more harm than good.

5) How can we call the global warming scare “science” when there has been so much fraud and manipulation of data by liberal zealots?

6) One final issue that isn’t discussed enough is the one about ulterior motives driving liberals (besides the fascist one of hoping for greater control). Scratch a liberal’s outward profession of wanting to help mankind and more often than not you’ll discover a twisted belief that if all wealth and civilized apparatus vanish, mankind can return to Mother Nature as a pure, primitive noble savage and that heaven on earth will finally arrive. In other words, when you tell a liberal that people will probably die as a result of their policies, inside they often clap their hands and shout “Goodie goodie! That’s what I wanted anyway.”

Burke on April 4, 2013 at 12:32 PM

It’s 42.

Lily on April 4, 2013 at 12:26 PM

Trying to be the teacher’s pet are we…?/
;)

My TRS-80 says “42″.
drunyan8315 on April 4, 2013 at 12:27 PM

Then you must also already know the ultimate question….

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 12:34 PM

Never in the course of human events has some much data been tortureed so much by so few … at least since the Tobacco Institute when out of business.

J_Crater on April 4, 2013 at 12:36 PM

My TRS-80 says “42″.

drunyan8315 on April 4, 2013 at 12:27 PM

Is TRS-80 the name of your pet white mouse?
;)

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Trying to be the teacher’s pet are we…?/
;)

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 12:34 PM

I may be white, but I’m no mouse :)

Lily on April 4, 2013 at 12:40 PM

The most important attribute a man-made Global Warming advocate MUST have is the ability to lie without flinching.

Axion on April 4, 2013 at 12:40 PM

Burke on April 4, 2013 at 12:32 PM

Those are all very valid questions. But I look at it another way.
We know the earth warms and cools in cycles – always has and always will.
Regardless of what’s causing the earth to warm or cool, can we really actually stop it? I’d say the answer to that is no. The cycles will continue, and even if there is some level of human influence, it would only be on the extent / extremes of the warming and cooling – not on the cycles themselves.

Therefore, wouldn’t it be wise for us to be prepared for any kind of weather? That means we need economically feasible technologies and the fuels to ensure that we can survive whatever kind of weather happens.

THAT means all of the currently proposed “solutions” by the liberals are absolutely the WRONG approach, because they are in fact limiting our ability to react to weather extremes.

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 12:46 PM

I may be white, but I’m no mouse :)

Lily on April 4, 2013 at 12:40 PM

What’s wrong with being a mouse?
Very few people realize that white mice are actually the most intelligent creatures on this planet….
And I’d say some of the libtard trolls on this site regularly prove that theory.

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 12:48 PM

What’s wrong with being a mouse?
Very few people realize that white mice are actually the most intelligent creatures on this planet….
And I’d say some of the libtard trolls on this site regularly prove that theory.

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 12:48 PM

That’s what they want you to think.

Lily on April 4, 2013 at 12:57 PM

Europe’s Easter was in snow, for the first time in 130 years.

“Climate Change” is the perfect excuse for anything to be taxed.

May all the fibbers have their heads split and may their brains be splattered on cement.

Schadenfreude on April 4, 2013 at 1:03 PM

That’s what they want you to think.

Lily on April 4, 2013 at 12:57 PM

LOL

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 1:04 PM

At one point he says that the difference between last spring and this spring shows “how unpredictable the climate can be,” but you can bet your bottom dollar he’s 100% certain he can predict that without massive regulatory expansion the climate will kill us all.

KGB on April 4, 2013 at 1:06 PM

The climate “scientists” on government payrolls have always been the loudest and have carried the day. Among the scientists not on a government dole whether here or elsewhere, there has always been a balance between believers in AGW, and nonbelievers. This has been true for decades.

Incidentally, I think HotAir has, as has much of the media, been unquestioning about this subject.

burt on April 4, 2013 at 1:35 PM

I’m not concerned about global warming. I made reservations to die from the hole in the ozone layer.

Dan_Yul on April 4, 2013 at 1:39 PM

But I’m sure bayam will be on here later telling us all how these people are right just because the claim to be climate scientists.

blink on April 4, 2013 at 11:37 AM

bayam would have been right at home on Tuesday morning atop Mt. Washington here in NH. It was -3

Del Dolemonte on April 4, 2013 at 1:40 PM

We need a really big@ss supercomputer that can determine for us the ultimate answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything. THEN we’ll be able to figure out what’s goin on.

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 12:14 PM

Unfortunately, a computer does nothing without a program…and a program cannot be written unless some human knows FOR SURE exactly how things work, so that he can write an accurate “model” into a program.

And therefore we’re forever doomed (or blessed) to a certain level of ignorance about life, the universe, and everything.

landlines on April 4, 2013 at 1:58 PM

And where are all of the “KILLER HURRICANES” like Katrina, that were supposed to follow one after the other?

GarandFan on April 4, 2013 at 11:32 AM

Hey, the hiatus in killer hurricanes just proves that they are all bunching up, queuing to hit us like machine-gun fire.

Axeman on April 4, 2013 at 2:08 PM

We need a really big@ss supercomputer that can determine for us the ultimate answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything. THEN we’ll be able to figure out what’s goin on.

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 12:14 PM

That’s a lot of money to pay for the number 42. (got both references)

Axeman on April 4, 2013 at 2:09 PM

“i” before “e” except after “c”…

bugsy on April 4, 2013 at 2:10 PM

III

dirtengineer on April 4, 2013 at 12:05 PM

You’re right, dirtengineer.

To make my statement accurate, I need to include that it’s viable in this particular narrative where whether it’s cooling or warming is a sign they’re right.

I’ve seen the graph you mentioned and you’re absolutely correct, they established a 95-75% accuracy baseline that the actual temperature is about to pass out of in a couple of years.

They put themselves in a rock and a hard place, and the warmists are about to get pinched.

itsspideyman on April 4, 2013 at 2:12 PM

This man is entirely over his head in any discussion of science. And he has no idea.

pat on April 4, 2013 at 2:13 PM

Hey, the hiatus in killer hurricanes just proves that they are all bunching up, queuing to hit us like machine-gun fire.

Axeman on April 4, 2013 at 2:08 PM

That’s just part of the weirding – we’re NOT getting any hurricanes when we should – and that’s weird.
So basically by going to “weird”, they now can justify that anything that happens contrary to what they predict is weird, and therefore proves their wrong predictions to be right.

dentarthurdent on April 4, 2013 at 2:41 PM

These people can’t even tell us what the weather will be next week, and we’re supposed to believe they know what the climate will be like in 2020.

JackM on April 4, 2013 at 3:00 PM

Global warming is a great scientific breakthrough rather like the searched for Higgs boson particle.

Global warming is the single universal constant, no matter the weather, hot, cold, wet, dry, hurricanes, no hurricanes, pole ice, less pole ice, more snow, less snow, it’s all caused by global warming. It’s truly an amazing discovery!

The only other thing with such a universal standing is governments’ need for ever more tax money from the people and in a happy coincidence, massive new taxes are the cure for global warming!

RJL on April 4, 2013 at 3:11 PM

Hmmmmm….aren’t we entering the peak of the current solar cycle?

cozmo on April 4, 2013 at 11:11 AM

I just tried to research that and I came up with this NASA site:
http://solarscience.msfc.nasa.gov/predict.shtml

If you click the graph you will get a much larger graph that shows it clearly.

And the answer to your question I believe is: YES, we are currently at the peak of the solar cycle, or very near it. It only gets colder from here.

Axion on April 4, 2013 at 3:14 PM

bayam would have been right at home on Tuesday morning atop Mt. Washington here in NH. It was -3

Del Dolemonte on April 4, 2013 at 1:40 PM

Given that Mt. Washington had the worlds record for a wind speed of 252 mph for decades and that the temperature goes to -40F in the colder months, -3 seems balmy even in April.

burt on April 4, 2013 at 3:20 PM

And hysterics are still hysterics, and they’re just as weird as they were in 1979, 1879, or any other time period.

Correct, but we used to get a good chuckle from a hysteric marching down the street wearing a “End of the World” sandwich board sign, but now our politicians have embraced the fools in order to justify massive new taxes and regulations over every facet of our lives.

RJL on April 4, 2013 at 3:21 PM

Remember 1979? That was…before voicemail and answering machines.

Voicemail yes, but Binswanger must not have watched The Rockford Files.

WarEagle01 on April 4, 2013 at 3:25 PM

Do regulators even need a rational reason to impose their predilictions? We are going to get carbon reduction no matter whether it cools or heats the climate or not.

I remember when the New York Department of Environmental Conservation wanted to impose water conservation measures statewide because New York City’s watershed was low. When I asked the author of the draft regulation why parts of the state along lake Erie, Lake Ontario and the Niagara river shouldn’t run sales on water to make use of the surplus of water treatment capacity left over before upstate depopulated and the inexhaustible supply of local water rather than impose “rationing”, his response was “because water conservation is a good thing”.

KW64 on April 4, 2013 at 4:06 PM

“Global warming can mean colder. It can mean wetter. It can mean drier. That’s what we’re talking about.” – Greenpeace activist Stephen Guilbeault, 2010

“Global Weirding” is a psychological disease having no foundation in physical reality.

theCork on April 4, 2013 at 4:13 PM

Can’t we get someone to fund some good young comics to make fun of this cr*p ? I mean, seriously, it’s good SNL skits bursting at the seams.

If only Jay Leno would go full reality, this would be a snap.

williampeck1958 on April 4, 2013 at 4:47 PM

Hasn’t Walsh heard that “Global Climate Change” is now as out as “Global Warming” and “Global Water Shortage” is now the new “in” topic?

Earth’s Water Cycle, The Sun’s solar/magnetism cycle be damned! Pay no attention to the faked data! Never mind the last 30 years of cooling when warming was predicted!!! The climate can’t wait another minute for us to obey our fascist overlords!!!11!eleventy! … just in case … you you you bunch deniers!

You’ll be thirsty you just wait!

PoliTech on April 4, 2013 at 5:22 PM

Let’s just pass a law banning global warming. It may have no effect on global warming, but at least we did something!!

JackM on April 5, 2013 at 7:51 AM

A recent poll shows that 85% of all Eskimos are in favor of unabated global warming.

The other 15% moved to Florida.

JackM on April 5, 2013 at 7:53 AM

I heard Hell is getting hotter by the day, but they could have been Ted Kennedy’s reception getting out of hand.

Archivarix on April 4, 2013 at 11:00 AM

Good one.

JackM on April 5, 2013 at 8:00 AM

The changing seasons are proof of global warming.

JackM on April 5, 2013 at 8:01 AM

Comment pages: 1 2